GAO Sustains For Failure To Set Aside For Small Business
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.20.04
In Information Ventures, Inc. (Oct. 8, 2004), GAO sustained a pre-award protest of an unrestricted procurement because the agency failed to take reasonable efforts to ascertain whether at least two small businesses were capable of performing the work, and, in fact, that the agency ignored known information that there were at least two small businesses that could have done so. Lesson learned from this case is that small businesses should carefully monitor the issuance of unrestricted procurements and object prior to the submission of proposals (due to strict GAO timeliness rules) if they believe that multiple small business are capable of performing the work.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.26.25
From ‘Second’ to ‘First:’ Federal Circuit Tackles Obvious Claim Errors
Patent claims must be clear and definite, as they set the boundaries of the patentee’s rights. Occasionally, however, claim language contains errors, such as typographical mistakes or incorrect numbering. Courts possess very limited authority to correct such errors. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has emphasized that judicial correction is appropriate only in rare circumstances, where (1) the error is evident from the face of the patent, and (2) the proposed correction is the sole reasonable interpretation in view of the claim language, specification, and prosecution history. See Group One, Ltd. v. Hallmark Cards, Inc., 407 F.3d 1297, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) and Novo Indus., L.P. v. Micro Molds Corp., 350 F.3d 1348, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
Client Alert | 5 min read | 11.26.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.25.25
Brussels Court Clarifies the EU’s SPC Manufacturing Waiver Regulation Rules
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.24.25
